delete_openvpn_client

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the description adds extra context by explicitly warning that the operation is irreversible. This goes beyond the annotation's binary destructive flag, providing a meaningful behavioral detail. No contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: a single clear sentence plus a warning. Every word earns its place, and the main action is front-loaded. No unnecessary elaboration.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The schema, annotations, and output schema provide rich structured context (e.g., confirm safety gate, client_id source). The description's irreversibility warning fills the key gap not covered by structured fields. For a simple delete tool, this is complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter information beyond what the schema already provides. It does not mention the confirm or dry_run parameters, but the schema fully documents them.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Delete an OpenVPN client instance') and the method ('by ID'). It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like search_openvpn_clients or update_openvpn_client. The warning about irreversibility reinforces the destructive purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like the confirm parameter. The irreversibility warning implies caution but does not clarify when this tool is appropriate compared to update_openvpn_client or how to find the client_id.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.